IBM mock test on UML

Hi can anyone suggest an answer for the question below
1) To MOST effectively manage teams working on different packages within a large project, which one of the following should be true?

a) Communications between the teams should be minimized to reduce overhead burdens while they work on separate, independent use cases for their packages.

b) One technical lead should control the project details and communicate decisions to the different teams.

c) An architecture board of team leads should negotiate and coordinate changes to inter-package messages.

d) The team leads should focus on quality designs for the internals of their packages, mentoring their team members.

Dear Rahul
I think the answer should be b). Ther should be a person identified to communicate the decisions of the team across each other.
answer a is not valid as the packages are still part of the project. Excessive xcommunication is never an overhead
c) in my opinion would lead to excessive overhead
d) is partly accurate but doesnot answer the question.

btw can i have the link to the mock exam for uml
Preety

i think , answer should be C. As the team of architects can negotiate the thing properly. Each head will be responsible for the his / her own package. The problems encountered by them , regarding dependencies on other packages can be sorted out properly. there is no question of overjhead. In big projects , tit is not at all single person's job. it will be quite diffficult for a single person to know 100's of classes , their relationship with one another . the answer C is best for large projects.
Answer A is correct for small teams of 4 to 10 people ( As per XP , there shall be maximum comm. between team memebers. the SEI CMM , ISO are not useful. You capture the spirit of the project. Don'tmake your programmer a documentation clerk. Work 40 hrs . a week. these are certain guideline or golden rules of the Extreme Programming.Guru Kent Beck )
Rahaul , the question seems to be ambiguous from that point of view. You let me know what is the correct answer.

bye. regards.

sorry , rahul , i haven't read the question properly. You have mentioned that the project is large in your question. Thus , i will definitely go with the option C as the answer , which is be the best possible solution for the given situation , in gien condition.
bye & hope this will help u. tell me about the correct answer.

Sailesh,
I am sorry but i do not know the correct answer

c and d both seem right to me. But again this is a single select question. As Craig Larman really puts an emphasis on architecture, I will go with C.
Any input is welcomed!

Hi,
I would lean towards C.
A is incorrect.
If you have seperate/parallel teams working on different usecases (and layers), the inter-dependency is bound to be there between the teams.One team would want the input from another team- So "minimum communication" doesnot seem realistic.
B is incorrect.
As mentioned above, communication cannot be avoided.It is better to have a single point of control for effective communication across teams.However, having only one technical lead for a large project with multi-tier architecture would not be very effective.
C is correct.
For a large team to have effective communication, you can have Team Leads on architectural level who can be involved in negotiating and co-ordinating changes to inter-package messages.This will allow sharing of responsibities on architecture level.
D is incorrect.
The mentoring should be done by one of the more experienced developers of the team.Someone has to take the responsibility to communicate across teams to get the inputs from other architectural layers.
As I said, each team will require an input from another team - There is a need to co-ordinate this.It would have been, B if it was a small project; for a large project it is MOST effective to have Team Leads on a layer basis.
Hope this helps,
-- Sandeep

Thanks a lot!

C. seems to be best suited. From practical experience working on a team of over 40 people distributed over UK and US, communication was extremely important. But we could not involve everyone in decision making as it wasn't efficient. We finally settled on two weekly conference calls of (sub)team leads where dependencies amongst the tracks were discussed and resolved. It is working out well.
One person making all decisions isn't the best as that person cannot know all the details of each package.